Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in
All Questions
Question 10
Bercot claims there are “no ramifications whatsoever” in doctrine or lifestyle from accepting the Apocrypha—yet he also says these books remove the “fictitious 400 years of silence” and show God preparing His people (demons in Tobit, immortality in Wisdom, care for the poor and forbidding oaths in Sirach, rulers as God’s ministers); how can both be true, and what concrete changes might happen in your reading habits, preaching emphasis, or discipleship priorities if you took his “no silence” claim seriously?
Another way to ask: How can Bercot say accepting the Apocrypha changes nothing, but also say it ends the “400 years of silence” and shows God at work? If you believed there was no silence, what might change in how you read the Bible, preach, or disciple others?

Direct Answer Bercot can say “no ramifications” in the sense of no new required doctrines or commandments that change a Christian’s walk, while still saying the Apocrypha brings major benefits in understanding history and seeing God’s preparation for Christ. Taking his “no silence” claim seriously would likely reshape what you read, what background you teach, and what connections you highlight between the Old and New Testaments.

Support from Transcript:

  • He insists acceptance won’t force major doctrinal shifts: “There are no ramifications whatsoever. No doctrines are affected. There’s no new commandments… no impact on your walk with Christ.”
  • Yet he argues it ends the “fictitious 400 years of silence” and calls the Protestant silence idea a “lie” from scribes and Pharisees reshaped by Protestants.
  • He says the Apocrypha gives key history: “we learn most of the story… between the time of Ezra and the birth of Christ,” including Daniel’s fulfillment, Jewish struggles, Roman entanglement, and the origin of the Feast of Dedication (John 10:22).
  • He gives preparation examples: demons appear in Tobit; immortality of the soul becomes clear in Wisdom; Sirach emphasizes the poor, forbids habitual swearing, and speaks of rulers as “ministers of God,” paralleling Romans 13.
  • He argues NT readers would recognize allusions: “Jesus and His apostles were frequently alluding to these books and borrowing phrases.”
Discussion Follow-ups If you taught the “intertestamental” period as part of God’s ongoing revelation rather than silence, how might that affect sermons on Jesus’ ministry (demons, oaths, wealth/poverty, authorities) and your habit of reading the Old Testament?

Jumpstarter 10 of 10
Back Questions Done